I have alot of ides for Hoi3 that would keep the fun parts and redo alot of it.
Engine wise:
Look at Civ4, see the engine focus and how mods like fall from heaven 2 is a better game than Civ4 could ever be?
Focus on the engine with a basic setting for WW2 but capable of all 20th century combat, and let mod builders and scenario makers make the historical aspects of it. You could just cover WW2 in the first pack and sell additional ones that support other eras without making an entire game in that era...
Game wise:
Every decision should matter. Nothing should be static. The world beyond the starting point should not be fixed. And the game should be organised the way control over a country was. Not by micromanagement but by setting goals and targets on a higher level, with the lower level still accessible but not necessary for playing. It's great to see all divisions on the map and see all the action, but why do you want to control all of these all the time?
Every military action should be an operation, say, Germany wants to invade poland. There are limited operations that can be done at any given time. Resources should be allocated, and leaders set with responsibilities.
Pick a plan for the operation. The game would ship with all operations and plans made in WW2 and the most plausible ones that were planned, all with different executions depending on the doctrine of the aggressor. Then the community could add operations and different ways to handle an operation that the player can choose OR the AI can pick depending on the assigned generals traits and doctrines... Guderian would pick blitzkrieg usage to surround enemies but other generals would pick another plan.
On the research side... Techteams should learn skills as they try new things and depening on their funding, The result of the project should vary, maybe [techteam] did so and so and made a mediocre tank, and another made a great tank... Trading designs with other countries would then really mean something...
Other Example, Leaders and units are equipped with a certain doctrine. The leader have a certain trait that determine their personality. The unit should then be moved accordingly, that is the AI should use it accordingly. The player CAN micromanage, like hitler, or just let the leaders follow directives according to their doctrine, like stalin in latewar.
To change a doctrine or let the unit and commander use another doctrine the unit should have to be retrained. Doctrines should be like brigade attachments but you can have several, each at increasing cost...
This would make a more team management aspect to it.
Another example, Intel, Spies should have names, agendas and personality and where they work and events that let you influence their actions and also a funding. No more have to send a spy once a week, set your funding and the one in charge, he will try to place spies according to his doctrine, if you recruit a spy that works in the goverment or a techteam or military you can get events that show his progress and such. Who cares about the other 45 spies that doesn't matter?
I really see the potential in how popular Hoi3 could be, but also the pits Hoi2 has fallen into (most features cannot be used by the ai, intelligence system is just work without reward, events are needed because the AI can't make decisions etc, micromanagement in large wars)
This is just skimming the surface of my ideas, but if noone reads them why put in more work? hehe
By they way, does paradox read this? Anyone?
Engine wise:
Look at Civ4, see the engine focus and how mods like fall from heaven 2 is a better game than Civ4 could ever be?
Focus on the engine with a basic setting for WW2 but capable of all 20th century combat, and let mod builders and scenario makers make the historical aspects of it. You could just cover WW2 in the first pack and sell additional ones that support other eras without making an entire game in that era...
Game wise:
Every decision should matter. Nothing should be static. The world beyond the starting point should not be fixed. And the game should be organised the way control over a country was. Not by micromanagement but by setting goals and targets on a higher level, with the lower level still accessible but not necessary for playing. It's great to see all divisions on the map and see all the action, but why do you want to control all of these all the time?
Every military action should be an operation, say, Germany wants to invade poland. There are limited operations that can be done at any given time. Resources should be allocated, and leaders set with responsibilities.
Pick a plan for the operation. The game would ship with all operations and plans made in WW2 and the most plausible ones that were planned, all with different executions depending on the doctrine of the aggressor. Then the community could add operations and different ways to handle an operation that the player can choose OR the AI can pick depending on the assigned generals traits and doctrines... Guderian would pick blitzkrieg usage to surround enemies but other generals would pick another plan.
On the research side... Techteams should learn skills as they try new things and depening on their funding, The result of the project should vary, maybe [techteam] did so and so and made a mediocre tank, and another made a great tank... Trading designs with other countries would then really mean something...
Other Example, Leaders and units are equipped with a certain doctrine. The leader have a certain trait that determine their personality. The unit should then be moved accordingly, that is the AI should use it accordingly. The player CAN micromanage, like hitler, or just let the leaders follow directives according to their doctrine, like stalin in latewar.
To change a doctrine or let the unit and commander use another doctrine the unit should have to be retrained. Doctrines should be like brigade attachments but you can have several, each at increasing cost...
This would make a more team management aspect to it.
Another example, Intel, Spies should have names, agendas and personality and where they work and events that let you influence their actions and also a funding. No more have to send a spy once a week, set your funding and the one in charge, he will try to place spies according to his doctrine, if you recruit a spy that works in the goverment or a techteam or military you can get events that show his progress and such. Who cares about the other 45 spies that doesn't matter?
I really see the potential in how popular Hoi3 could be, but also the pits Hoi2 has fallen into (most features cannot be used by the ai, intelligence system is just work without reward, events are needed because the AI can't make decisions etc, micromanagement in large wars)
This is just skimming the surface of my ideas, but if noone reads them why put in more work? hehe
By they way, does paradox read this? Anyone?
Upvote
0
